Immediate Effects of Failed Columbus?

The ones in north africa would be the ones I am refering to (they called all muslims moors at the time).

Ah. Still, I'm not sure that the Moors would be the best example of "leave alone" as opposed to attempting to, at the very least, vassalize them (the Aztecs and such groups) - which would take military force, I suspect.
 
Ah. Still, I'm not sure that the Moors would be the best example of "leave alone" as opposed to attempting to, at the very least, vassalize them (the Aztecs and such groups) - which would take military force, I suspect.

Well yes but they also rarely tried to attempt that, after that time where the Portuguese king and his entire army disappeared and where presumed dead they planned on being cautious with them from then on which they would likely continue with the natives.
 
Well yes but they also rarely tried to attempt that, after that time where the Portuguese king and his entire army disappeared and where presumed dead they planned on being cautious with them from then on which they would likely continue with the natives.

Charles V's expeditions come to mind.

"Cautious" is one thing. But that can mean "extensive preparation first" as easily as "not attempting aggression". Particularly if the natives don't look as threatening - sheer numbers are not very intimidating.
 
Did we forget the Chinese? According to Gavin Menzis........!!!!!

Ok, that's naughty - teasing.

It could be more interesting to see if the Portuguese, after having discovered Southern Africa in 1488 carry on in a more determined way.

Then America's would have been discovered from the West coast?

Ivan
 
the Spanish were also very active in southern Italy at this time. so If the managed to "sweep" through Northern Africa they might have conquered Italy. Then there would have been a Spanish controlled Church. Perhaps it would have prolonged the 30 years war?
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Add to that the theory that the Portuguese had already reached Brazil after being blown off course while going South I'm convinced the discovery of the America's is only a matter of time.

We had another thread on this a few months back. It is only a matter of a few years (decade or so) and Brazil will be found.
 
The thing is, colonialism in a big way was motivated by gold. The Spanish took control of the Caribbean through Columbus but weren't particularly interested in the mainland. If Cortez hadn't found gold with the Aztecs, he would have been put to death for treason. The whole reason the British colonies took a while to kick off, and the French barely started doing keepy-uppies colonial-stylee was because at the time there was relatively little mineral wealth in the area. Colonies were dependent on agriculture and fisheries which isn't the sort of thing that gets kings excited. If they discover chilly Newfoundland first and considering much of North America which is on a similar latitude to Europe is a lot chillier, why would these kings want to send colonists half way round the world at great expense, to somewhere chilly and populated by angry natives for little to no reward. It makes no sense. Therefore, colonisation is likely to begin privately through companies like the Bristol Company of Merchants and Adventurers, who will try and build up trade relations with the natives who will bring them the resources via port-cities in return for suitable compensation, rather than bringing colonists in at greater expense, monetarilly and diplomatically.
 
Top